Started By
Message
Sporting News: Undoing the Northwestern Union Decision
Posted on 3/31/14 at 9:08 pm
Posted on 3/31/14 at 9:08 pm
This article from John Infante with Sporting News higlights some areas in which the NCAA can preemptively challenge the NLRB ruling. However, while I think they are all valid suggestions I think there would be an equal outcry should the NCAA attempt to institute them
quote:
Cut Back on Athletic Time Commitment. The NCAA allows schools to have 20 hours per week of required athletically related activity during the season, with one day off required each week. But as Big 12 commissioner Bob Bowlsby pointed out, that number is at least stretched by coaches if not falsified outright. To that, athletes add another 20-30 hours of extra work that runs the spectrum from truly voluntary to strongly suggested. This could be cut by eliminating the tricks used to extend the 20-hour limit, limiting athlete’s access to facilities for voluntary workouts, and cutting back on offseason and summer workouts.
quote:
Reduce Control by Coaches. The way coaches control the lives of student-athletes, through teams rules, curfews, class checks, and monitoring hurts the argument against employee status in two ways. First, it makes them look like bosses rather than coaches. And second, it shows that they — not the faculty — are primarily overseeing the players. Outside of the(potentially reduced) amount of time players spend on athletics, coaches should have little or no control over their lives. Any team rules that are established should be created by or with faculty members who can sign off on their academic benefit.
quote:
Guarantee Scholarships. Athletic scholarships are always going to be awarded based on athletic skill. But once they are, athletics should be removed from the equation. Scholarships should only be canceled for the same reasons that academic scholarships are taken away. The NLRB’s decision takes this very far though. It may mean preventing institutions from canceling aid even when athletes fall academically ineligible (but not kicked out of school) and allowing athletes to keep their scholarships even after they quit the team.
quote:
Create an Athletics Major. An athletics major, either in athletics performance or athletics education (i.e. coaching), wraps up all the elements of the previous solutions. An athletics major reduces the overall time commitment and gives an academic nexus to athletic time demands. It turns coaches into faculty members, meaning they are directing students rather than controlling players. And it ties an athletic scholarship more closely to a athlete's education. In short, an athletics major both solves some of the problems raised by the NLRB while at the same time provides a justification for avoiding other radical changes to college athletics.
Posted on 3/31/14 at 9:09 pm to undecided
Don't change the subject. Oh, and wrong board.
Posted on 3/31/14 at 9:11 pm to nc14
Vanderbilt is a private university and ultimately the NLRB ruling affects all of college athletics which makes this article appropriate for tRant
Posted on 3/31/14 at 9:59 pm to undecided
I got a better idea, just kick the private schools out of the NCAA or better yet, stop giving scholarships for football, basketball or amy other sport, then sit back and watch those liberal POS lawyers back track, saying , no, please no, we are sorry, please give back the scholarships.
Call the SOBs bluff.
Call the SOBs bluff.
Posted on 4/1/14 at 12:02 am to S.E.C. Crazy
Lou Holtz had the best response: he said the Northwestern QB lied on the stand when he testified under oath that some weeks he practiced, meetings, etc for up to 60 hours. Lou said the NCAA limits time to 20 hours so the QB lied and should be tried as a criminal for perjury.
Posted on 4/1/14 at 1:43 am to undecided
Unionizing CFB is such a horrible concept.
Posted on 4/1/14 at 2:38 am to matthew25
Didn't two of Dr Lou's programs get ncaa sanctions? There's a guy who knows a thing or two about coaches following rules
Posted on 4/1/14 at 9:32 am to S.E.C. Crazy
Ahh, kick all the private schools out!
What a great argument.
Here goes Duke, Vanderbilt, Stanford, Miami, Southern Cal, Northwestern, Syracuse, Notre Dame, Boston College, etc.
Please, do hold your breath.
What a great argument.
Here goes Duke, Vanderbilt, Stanford, Miami, Southern Cal, Northwestern, Syracuse, Notre Dame, Boston College, etc.
Please, do hold your breath.
Posted on 4/1/14 at 10:02 am to KoolHndLuke
This is all just a bunch of off-season bullshyte for the sake of having something to debate and discuss. Nothing will come of this.
Posted on 4/1/14 at 10:06 am to NewtonReb
quote:
Ahh, kick all the private schools out!
What a great argument.
Here goes Duke, Vanderbilt, Stanford, Miami, Southern Cal, Northwestern, Syracuse, Notre Dame, Boston College, etc.
The day the privates drop out is the day conferences are subject to sunshine laws. Not going to happen.
Posted on 4/1/14 at 10:08 am to S.E.C. Crazy
quote:
stop giving scholarships for football, basketball or amy other sport
This actually works for the Ivy League.
Posted on 4/1/14 at 10:11 am to Person of interest
quote:
This actually works for the Ivy League.
Not for poor kids wanting an MIT education.
Posted on 4/1/14 at 10:14 am to Person of interest
quote:Yeah - I wonder how many stud 5*'s from Florida/Alabama/Lousisiana/Mississippi would get into the Ivy's?
This actually works for the Ivy League.
Posted on 4/1/14 at 10:22 am to RT1941
quote:
Yeah - I wonder how many stud 5*'s from Florida/Alabama/Lousisiana/Mississippi would get into the Ivy's?
The issue is good vs great and the value of inherited money
In the rest of the country poor kids can use college athletics to actually springboard to better academic educations. In the Ivy's (without sports scholarships) it is the same trust fund gene pool to make up the student bodies. And they think kids in the south are inbred!
Posted on 4/1/14 at 10:30 am to Cheese Grits
quote:
Not for poor kids wanting an MIT education.
Poor kids get a free ride if they qualify academically, same as all students. Edit I mean all students can apply for financial aid and get it according to need.
This post was edited on 4/1/14 at 10:40 am
Posted on 4/1/14 at 10:32 am to RT1941
quote:
Yeah - I wonder how many stud 5*'s from Florida/Alabama/Lousisiana/Mississippi would get into the Ivy's?
If all schools adopted this model it would negate the lawsuits. Treat them as students not athletes.
Posted on 4/1/14 at 12:51 pm to RT1941
You missed the point.
Once this gets voted in, the punk lawyers will fold their weak hand.
Just the threat of taking these scholarships away will have the desired effect.
If we had to ultimately do this, I am sure kids could get government grants to go to school and then could play ball, personally I don't give a shyt, maybe this would weed out some of the morons.
And those saying we can't vote to exclude private institutions !!!
WHY, we damn sure can have 18 teams that pay and the rest who don't.
Let's face it, these players aren't employees, it's a silly ruling by a bunch of commies.
Once this gets voted in, the punk lawyers will fold their weak hand.
Just the threat of taking these scholarships away will have the desired effect.
If we had to ultimately do this, I am sure kids could get government grants to go to school and then could play ball, personally I don't give a shyt, maybe this would weed out some of the morons.
And those saying we can't vote to exclude private institutions !!!
WHY, we damn sure can have 18 teams that pay and the rest who don't.
Let's face it, these players aren't employees, it's a silly ruling by a bunch of commies.
Posted on 4/1/14 at 1:04 pm to undecided
quote:
Guarantee Scholarships. Athletic scholarships are always going to be awarded based on athletic skill. But once they are, athletics should be removed from the equation. Scholarships should only be canceled for the same reasons that academic scholarships are taken away. The NLRB’s decision takes this very far though. It may mean preventing institutions from canceling aid even when athletes fall academically ineligible (but not kicked out of school) and allowing athletes to keep their scholarships even after they quit the team.
of all the suggestions I think this is the most realistic and fair.
Posted on 4/1/14 at 1:22 pm to Dr RC
I was partial to reduce control by coaches. Particularly the idea of making the professors more involved in the lives of the "student" athlete. He was very astute in saying coaches do look like employers with the amount of control the exercise over players
Posted on 4/1/14 at 2:20 pm to undecided
Just how is a university going to get professors more involved in student athletes? Many of the larger universities have classes with 200-300 students. And won't the professor ask for more money to go along with new, additional duties? And there are many professors who are anti athletics; do you think that professor who hates football will go out of his way to help a player in his class? Or could he possibly do something to sabotage that player's academic standing? But, either way, this is not going away & it won't remain a private school issue for much longer.
Popular
Back to top
Follow SECRant for SEC Football News